We have spoken of the evils likely to result from one extreme in regard to religious means; that of multiplying them to a great extent, measuring religion by their number or use, and allowing them to be regarded as the great duty, if not life of the Christian. We e are now to consider the opposite course, or rather the way in which the evils of the first may be avoided, and all the good secured. We would speak as earnestly as we can in behalf of religious means. would quicken ourselves and others to a stronger sense of the danger of any neglect of means and ordinances. From this we fear more evil, as we have already said, than from the opposite abuse, at least in that part of the community with which we are most connected. Our own errors and dangers we wish to understand, not to conceal. For ourselves and for all, we would

We

secure to religion the highest respect possible, and the most complete spiritual dominion.

For the attainment of this object, we look to the serious faithful use of the appointed and common means of religion; family and secret prayer, the observance of the Sabbath, and a regular attendance upon the ordinances of the Christian faith. It is not so much that we attach peculiar sacredness and a distinct efficacy to these, above all other possible means, but it is that we think these sufficient. We think them rational, proper, congenial with our natures, consistent with all our duties, aiding indeed the discharge of every duty, and exerting an influence incomparably the best, because the most quiet, unostentatious, undeceiving and unfailing. To these forms and means we look for the support and power of our religion. Around these we would gather all our forces; and we wish all zeal of all parties, their energy, their benevolence, their individual examples and combined power, may be mainly directed to the single object of sustaining these institutions, guarding them from abuse, and causing them to exert a regular, commanding, holy influence on all. Let this be done, and it will be all we can desire: until it is done, we shall expect little from any other exertion.

First, let men feel that their nature, human nature, requires such props and helps as these institutions offer. Let them feel that beside being important if not essential to the health and vigor of the social system, they are essential to personal religion, in relation to the mass of mankind at least. We do need visible forms, stated seasons, consecrated places and services. We are not

purely etherial beings yet. We have an animal as well as a spiritual nature, an animal which so completely encloses the spiritual, that all approach to the latter must be by the aid of the former. The senses not. only may but must be employed, for they are the inlets to the soul. The sympathies of our nature must be addressed and encouraged. We must be brought out of solitude and selfishness, brought together, and allowed to act upon one another by example and contact. There must be something stated, visible, and tangible, something in which we can join, and whose influence we cannot entirely resist.

As we intimated in the beginning of our remarks, there are some who seem to think we do not need these gross external helps Religion,' they say, 'is a work of the spirit, the service it demands is entirely spiritual, and does not require the aid of forms and rites. Indeed it is not safe to entrust it to forms and rites, lest they should enslave it, and make it earthly, material, and sensual.' We have no such fear. We believe some forms to be indispensable. There may be men of very contemplative habits and highly spiritual frame, who do not depend upon forms for the existence or ardor of their piety, but are able to sustain it from within. But even these, if such there be, would be aided, we think, by a proper use of forms and seasons. And at best they are very few. Most men are of very different make. Their early habits, their associations, their employments and trials, are such as make it absolutely necessary for them to avail themselves of external incentives and aids. And for their sakes, supposing we do not need it ourselves, we ought to encourage the use of means.

Again, therefore, we say, let men feel it to be wrong, wrong to others and to themselves, to neglect religious institutions. There seems to be a growing carelessness on this subject. Many excuse themselves, for instance, from public worship for the slightest reason, and their consciences are quite easy about it. Or, they go half the day, and do what they please the other half. They speak of this and like observances as well enough in themselves, highly useful to society, and necessary to some, but not to be insisted upon for all. They have no idea of making themselves slaves to such things, or depending upon them. One day is as holy as another. They can be as religious at home as at church, in the market-place or the field, as in the temple or the closet. Religion is not to be shut up within such narrow walls, nor tied down by such material bands. It is free, and all should be free who profess it.

Free to do what? To neglect and abuse it? Free to let it alone until it faints and expires? This would seem to be the freedom which some suppose religion confers. We should be sorry that any such opinions should gain favor. We believe them to be quite as dangerous, as unsound and pernicious, as those opposite opinions and practices on which we have already remarked. We believe that too little attendance and reliance on religious forms, is a greater evil than too much. We should welcome the old extreme of strictness and rigor, in preference to that of laxity and neglect. And we feel particularly anxious to check if we can, those tendencies to laxity which we see, or think we see, in our own community. These tendencies may result naturally from the character of our civil

institutions, and the state of our country. It is an evil inseparable perhaps from increasing freedom of inquiry and a jealous liberty of conscience, that encroachments are gradually made on old habits of thought and action, which cone to be considered as the superstitions and prejudices of a darker period, until they are entirely laid aside and the good surrendered with the evil. As the restraints of civil authority are taken off, men have nothing to fear but public opinion. And this they fear less and less, or public opinion itself utters a feebler and more indulgent voice. We fear it may be said of our own, we know it may of some other sections of our country, that what called religious liberty is carried to a pernicious extent. Business and pleasure are making fearful inroads on time that was once sacred, in form and custom at least. The Sabbath is not only less rigidly observed than it once was, but it is less distinguished in any way from other days. Conscience has become less tender and timid in regard to its violation-the conscience of the individual and of the community, if there be such a thing. The reproach fixed upon any profanation of this day or neglect of religious forms, is wholly insufficient to restrain those who have no principle to restrain them. With all this, there is a peculiar jealousy and sensitiveness to reproof on this subject, presenting a great obstacle to the removal of the evil itself. There is an implied charge that when we.condemn this particular sin or warn against this danger, we invade private rights, interfere with private interests, and would, as far as we can, coerce men into an observance of religious forms and days.

This state of feeling, wherever it exists, is all wrong.